To the "Anti-vaxxers"

[Lesh]

prove it.

 

[Lesh]

why did people die from taking them then?

Thee have been hundreds of millions of vaccinations and there are "reports" (unconfirmed) of adverse reactions resulting in deaths for 6,000

Do the math

 

[Lesh]

oh I care, I care that you all misrepresent reality. certainly, you believe pooh flung material from stupid polls . Where no one knows who actually answered the poll.

So what would convince you? What evidence would you even look at?

 

[iceberg]

Thank you.

Kaz says that I misunderstood my graph. Would you say that’s accurate? Just curious of your input since you seem pretty level-headed.

I had to go through it a few times to see the entire breakdown but I understood the question to be, do blacks get vaccinated at a higher rate than Republicans.

Seems from this chart, yes.

what that actually means is where the fun begins.

 

[Who_Me?]

You go brother! Don't let them inject you with that DNA that will turn you into a goverment zombi bott and allow them to control you. Don't do it!

Congratulations! You just topped out the crock-o-meter

 

[iceberg]

most polls are 1000 people. some smaller numbers. so what is the poll?

it was under the methodology section and what, 1500 or so asked? 1800?

so we should have more than your minimum surveyed.

I think it's a lot to assume from 1800 random people but as it sits, it's just meant to be a representation of a cross section.

seems he made a point, was asked to show where he got it, he shows it, and then you attack the source.

puts us back to trying to guide a conversation to a desired outcome vs. simply underatanding what he is saying.

 

[iceberg]

let's look at the source.

Kaiser Family Foundation – Bias and Credibility

LEFT-CENTER BIAS These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording

mediabiasfactcheck.com

Seems they just put numbers on the wall. somehow that went from blacks being more likely to get vaccinated than Republicans (which is true *in this survey* and kff doesn't seem to be playing politics.

everyone else is but I don't see them doing it.

my question is, what difference does it make? so they are.

doesn't say vaccines are right or wrong or what we as a country should be doing.

But wow. the arguing.

 

[XponentialChaos]

I had to go through it a few times to see the entire breakdown but I understood the question to be, do blacks get vaccinated at a higher rate than Republicans.

Seems from this chart, yes.

what that actually means is where the fun begins.

I agree. Thank you.

kaz wouldn’t give me a straight answer to this question.

 

[iceberg]

I agree. Thank you.

kaz wouldn’t give me a straight answer to this question.

We unfortunately pick sides and fight to the death these days.

Maybe we can figure out why we do this when we are done doing this.

In whatever is left from the mess we are, making.

 

[XponentialChaos]

We unfortunately pick sides and fight to the death these days.

Maybe we can figure out why we do this when we are done doing this.

In whatever is left from the mess we are, making.

You’re more optimistic than I am lol.

 

[iceberg]

You’re more optimistic than I am lol.

only because the alternative scares the unholy shit out of me.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

View attachment 524883
Congratulations! You just topped out the crock-o-meter

Not sure where you are comiinhg from or if you understand sarcasm

 

[amethyst]

Well the inventor of mRNA technology, Dr. Robert Malone, would disagree with you, and I think he's worth listening to and believing over anyone else.

Inventor of mRNA Vaccine Floats Inconvenient Question About Possible 'Safety Issues' with Genetic Jab

Trust the science: The phrase has echoed across the world throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, a supposed safeguard against questioning what mainstream “science” feeds us — or even injects into us.

But as controversial as it seems, basement-dwelling, tinfoil hat-wearing conspiracy theorists aren’t the only ones acknowledging that something could go wrong with mRNA vaccines — some of the first vaccines authorized for distribution and COVID-19 prevention in the U.S.

This time Dr. Robert Malone — the inventor of mRNA vaccines — is considering the idea himself.
...
“What happens to confidence in public health and USG if ivermectin turns out to be safe and effective for COVID, and the genetic vaccines turn out to have [significant] safety issues?” he asked in a tweet on Saturday. “This looks like a very plausible scenario from where I sit.”
...
“Regarding post-COVID genetic vaccine syndromes. I know they happen, do not know how severe or frequent,” he wrote. “I argue for data transparency from @CDCGlobal @CDCgov and #QALY based risk/benefit assessment. Data. Science-based Medicine. Honesty. Transparency. Bioethics. Not conspiracy.”
...
Malone isn’t the only person to question just how safe mRNA vaccines are and to argue for transparency on the issue, but, as the man who pioneered mRNA science, it’s safe to say his arguments pack a punch.

With so little insight into mRNA vaccines at the time their distribution began, shouldn’t scientists have been wary of advocating for the widespread use of this new technology so soon?

Malone seems to think so.

Even without advocating for or against the administration of mRNA COVID vaccines — or any COVID vaccine, for that matter — scientists should be open to all possibilities and should ensure that their “consumers” are aware of these possibilities as well.

Questions like Malone’s have led Big Tech companies to slap free-thinkers with “medical misinformation” warnings and, along with them, a threat to ban these users from their platforms altogether.

Asking questions about this new technology is obviously highly discouraged.

And we can safely assume why.
.
.
.

More on the 'Mayo Clinic' below...

Have you even heard of Noravax? I bet not, ever wonder why? It's a traditional vaccine being developed in the US that shows more promising results than the mRNA vaccines.

Novavax's COVID-19 Vaccine: What You Need to Know

As far as your copy/paste herd immunity bs, I can find as many articles and links that will say say just the opposite. Suddenly herd immunity is no more?? lol But, trust the science, right???

Overall, 166,477,481 people or 51% of the population have been fully vaccinated out of a population of 331,449,281, that's a little over 50%, according to the CDC there have been over 35.8 million cases of covid, so that puts us at over 202 million people either vaccinated or having had covid. That's not including people that had it and never knew and never got tested, or people that had symptoms and didn't get tested because a family member had it and they assumed they had it. So we are well approaching herd immunity numbers, but they don't want that out because it may discourage people from getting their vaccine, and we can't have that.

Why Is There Such Reluctance to Discuss Natural Immunity?
...
Those of us wanting good information certainly don’t want any of those outcomes. But others seem perfectly fine to risk them. They include not only elected officials, members of the media, political talking heads, self-important bureaucrats, and their wide-eyed acolytes harassing shoppers, but strangely also highly prominent health organizations.

For example, late last year Jeffrey Tucker showed that the World Health Organization (WHO) suddenly, and “for reasons unknown,” changed its definition of “herd immunity.” Using screenshots from a cached version on the Internet Archive, Tucker showed how the WHO altered its definition in such a way as to erase completely the role of natural immunity. Before, the WHO rightly said it “happens when a population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection.” The WHO’s change stated that it happens “if a threshold of vaccination is reached.” Not long after Tucker’s piece appeared, the WHO restored natural immunity to its definition.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), seemingly apropos of nothing, on May 19 issued a “safety communication” to warn that FDA-authorized SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests “should not be used to evaluate immunity or protection from COVID-19 at any time.” The FDA’s concern appears to be that taking an antibody test too soon after receiving a vaccination may fail to show vaccine-induced antibodies, but why preclude its use for “identifying people with an adaptive immune response to SARS-CoV-2 from a recent or prior infection?” Especially after stating outright that “Antibody tests can play an important role in identifying individuals who may have been exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus and may have developed an adaptive immune response.”

Then there is the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director, Dr. Anthony Fauci, that ubiquitous font of fatuous guidance. He had told people that herd immunity would be at 60 to 70 percent immunity, and then he started publicly cinching those numbers up: 75 percent, 80 percent, 85 percent, even 90 percent (as if Covid-19 were as infectious as measles). He is quoted in the New York Times admitting to doing so deliberately to affect people’s behavior:


Now — or better put, as of this writing — Fauci has taken to arguing herd immunity is a “mystical elusive number,” a distracting “endgame,” and therefore not worth considering. Only vaccinations are worth counting. As he put it recently, “We don’t want to get too hung up on reaching this endgame of herd immunity because every day that you put 2 million to 3 million vaccinations into people [it] makes society be more and more protected.”

While composing an article about natural immunity and herd immunity for my home state of North Carolina, I happened to notice that the Mayo Clinic had removed a compelling factoid about natural immunity. It’s something I had quoted in an earlier discussion of the matter and wanted to revisit it.

Here’s what the Mayo Clinic once wanted people to know in its page on “Herd Immunity and COVID-19” with respect to natural immunity: “[T]hose who survived the 1918 flu (influenza) pandemic were later immune to infection with the H1N1 flu, a subtype of influenza A.” The Mayo Clinic pointed out that H1N1 was during the 2009-10 flu season, which would be 92 years later. That finding attested to just how powerful and long-lived natural immunity could be.

...

The Mayo Clinic also reoriented its page to feature vaccination over “the natural infection method” (method?) and added a section on “the outlook for achieving herd immunity in the U.S.” This new section stated that “it’s not clear if or when the U.S. will achieve herd immunity” but encouraged people nonetheless that “the FDA-authorized COVID-19 vaccines are highly effective at protecting against severe illness requiring hospitalization and death … allowing people to better be able to live with the virus.”

Why, from people who know better, is there so much interest in downplaying or erasing natural immunity?

Is it because it’s hard to quantify how many people have natural immunity? Is it out of a mix of good intentions and worry, that discussing natural immunity would somehow discourage (“nudge,” in Fauci’s term) people from getting vaccines who otherwise would? Is it simple oversight, being so focused on vaccinations that they just plain forgot about natural immunity? Or is something else at work?

Whatever the reason, it’s keeping Americans in the dark about how many people have active immunity from Covid-19. It’s keeping people needlessly fearful and suspicious of each other. It’s empowering executive overreach. Worst of all, it’s tempting people to consider government and business restrictions on the unvaccinated, regardless of their actual immunity.

None of these people or these institutions are to be trusted, period.

Dr Fleming tells us. the noravax spike proteins are made by moth cells start at 40:50.

 

[Lesh]

Dr Fleming tells us. the noravax spike proteins are made by moth cells start at 40:50.

You picked a real winner there nitwit

Doctor Sentenced in Health Care Fraud Scheme

archives.fbi.gov

 

[XponentialChaos]

Yes, my claim was true because you only showed me one link, and it was defective.

I think it's interesting how you're trying backtrack.

Here's what you said: "No, you did not send me a link showing Blacks are more likely to get the vac than republicans."

Did I show you a link showing that Blacks are more likely to get the vaccine than Republicans?

Here, let me help you out again. It seems like you can't answer this honestly.

The numbers of vaccinated and unvaccinated did not add up to 100% but something like 180%.

What the hell are you talking about? Where are you getting 180%?

 

[jc456]

it was under the methodology section and what, 1500 or so asked? 1800?

so we should have more than your minimum surveyed.

I think it's a lot to assume from 1800 random people but as it sits, it's just meant to be a representation of a cross section.

seems he made a point, was asked to show where he got it, he shows it, and then you attack the source.

puts us back to trying to guide a conversation to a desired outcome vs. simply underatanding what he is saying.

I agree, the point was shown invalid

 

[Lakhota]

I am putting this in politics instead of healthcare... because it is about the political side of all this.

I am as conservative as they come. Leftism is a cancer among us in many ways.
One, however, is not the vaccine.
Get vaccinated. We need to cut this thing down before a truly bad variant comes out. Delta is not it. It is not nearly as bad as bad as the original, but it can become worse as it will, inevitably morph itself.
As i have stated here a number of times my son is a Respiratory Specialist, and my daughter is a Respiratory Therapist. Both at major hospitals.
At the hospital my daughter works at, there are 44 Covid patients. 6 are in ICU. 2 are likely to die.
Wanna know the demographics?
All but two are minorities.
Only one is vaccinated.

Let that sink in. It is the same all over. Right now Covid is a sickness, primarily for the unvaccinated. Yes you can spout off some anecdotal situations that show some vaccinated people getting sick and even dying. But folks, the numbers are simply what the numbers are. And the numbers are the sick enough to be hospitalized - are overwhelmingly unvaccinated.

Getting vaccinated is not "giving in". It doesn't make you less conservative. It is not a "win" for the other side.
It is Goddamn common sense in order to stop a very possible bad ass variant from developing that will screw us over worse than 2020.

Jason Arena has the correct solution:




“If you don’t trust the medical field to prevent you from getting it, why do you trust them to cure you from it?” Arena asks coronavirus and vaccine skeptics in the video.

“Stick to your fucking guns and keep your motherfucking ass at home,” he continues. “Stop running to the hospital, putting everybody else at fucking risk and in turn the collateral damages; people like my wife who actually need medical fucking help for a chronic disease but get kicked out of the hospital because your dumb ass is too stupid to go get a fucking vaccine shot.”

“I don’t understand how you don’t believe in science to prevent disease but all of sudden you’ll run to the hospital to take every experimental drug they’ll give you to save your life,” Arena added. “It makes no sense.”

Man's Scathing Message For Anti-Vaxxers, Coronavirus-Deniers Goes Viral On TikTok

Jason Arena's damning question for people who downplay COVID-19 and refuse the vaccine has been seen millions of times.

www.huffpost.com

 

[iceberg]

I agree, the point was shown invalid

Why? I thought it was fine. At least from a poll / survey standpoint.

Which point are you referring to?

 

[Lakhota]

The antivaxxers and antimaskers who get COVID should just stay at home and suffer the consequences of their stupidity! Stop overcrowding hospitals!

 

[Colin norris]

Maybe you'll kill someone Mac. Vaccines do not prevent transmission

Cry harder

Give me the reason you won't get vaccinated and any evidence to support it.
I'll bet you haven't the courage to reply.